How can my LDS friend make her wedding special for everyone involved?

Question

Okay, so i was talking to my friend today, and she's getting married next summer! Yay! ^_^ Her RM proposed two days ago.

Well, she's a convert, and the only one in her family. She's always dreamed of the fairytale wedding, Vera Wang gown, flowers, her daddy giving her away, all that. Now, as much as she's looking forward to the temple wedding, she's confided in me that it just sank in that none of her family can be really involved at all.....and that makes her sad. She wants to have a ring ceremony afterward, and make it almost the way she imagined it, but heard that she can't make it very fancy, it has to be really simple.

Is that true? She has to downplay her ring ceremony in favor of her temple ceremony? Why? This part of it is more for her family than anything.....I ask because I heard the same thing, that your ring ceremony should be simple and brief.

There are rings, you can exchange them at the end of the ceremony inside the temple, or do it whenever. But the problem is how fancy she can make it..... whether she has to keep it simple, or can it be as extravagant as her checkbook can stand?

Non-members are not allowed to be in the temple. In fact, only members with recommends are allowed past the lobby. It is thought that only worthy people who will treat the ordinances reverently should be inside. That's worthy recommend holders. I have my own feelings on it,but I'll keep my mouth shut.

Ah, I forgot in my add that she can have the ring exchanging thing, but we both think that it will have to be brief and simple....and nothing fancy. Which isn't what she wants. She wants it to be similar to a regular ceremony in a country club.

I know the traditional vows and "wedding party" won't fit. But I'm not sure walking her down the aisle and flowers and piano music would be too much. It's not about him owning her, it's that she's his little girl, take care of her, kay?

Answer 1

WHOA 7 of 9, lol. Calm down, it's okay! ^_^

I think what they meant by that is if she had the civil ceremony first instead of the temple one, then she should keep it simple and have it in the chapel. As far as her reception, I'm sure she can have it any way she wants.^_^

Sounds to me like she's a little emotional about everything, inspiring a little hysteria. She'll make a beautiful bride. hehe.

Answer 2

There are certain rules about using the church building- but if she goes to a reception center or something- I think she can do what ever she wants as long as it does not undermine the covenants made in the temple.

They like us to keep things simple so that we don't downplay the importance of the Temple wedding.

I think in her situation she can do something a little fancier as long as she does not use the church building for her reception and festivities.

She really should check with her local leaders though and get advice for them.

She also should keep in mind that she is setting the example for her non member family and friends.

I am getting married in Feb. in the Temple. My fiance has family members that will not be able to attend the ceremony. We are just doing a reception after the temple and they know that. I think they are fine with that, but most are familiar enough with our customs that they are ok with it.

Edit**
If she lives in an area that recognizes temple marriages as a legal marriage, if she wants to have a civil ceremony, then she will have to wait a year for the temple ceremony. However some countries, like England I believe, don't recognize temple marriages. IN that case she can have a civil ceremony first, followed by a temple ceremony.

Answer 3

Ok, so I have two parts to my answer, and it may get a little long, but I hope not.

Part 1 - Why should the ring ceremony be simple? Because the important part has already taken place. They are married, better yet, married in the temple.

Part 2 - The order of the ring ceremony: There's a difference between a ring ceremony which is supposed to be simple, and a civil marriage ceremony. She can have all three if she wants. The appropriate order would be civil ceremony (go all out if she wants to), the temple marriage ceremony (very small, only for temple reccomend holders), then a ring ceremony (typically done either on the temple grounds, or wherever the reception is being held - I've seen it both simple and extravegant). Ok, so the difference between all of these. The civil ceremony is the exact same as any other church wedding, or Justice of the Peace marriage. It can be "as extravigant as her checkbook will allow" or it can be very simple. The catch is that there may be a time frame associated with it. I've been to two LDS civil ceremonies, in one case it was an Hispanic couple who came over from Mexico and over there it's actually easier to just live together than to be married. It was very simple, but nice. Their best friends were there as Matron of Honor and Best Man, their little girl was the flower girl, and the son of their best friends was the ring barer. There was music and she walked down the aisle, it was very nice. Neither of them were members of the church at that time, but became members the following week.
The second civil ceremony was of a close friend who had been divorced and she married a man who had also been divorced (both were temple divorces - which is another subject altogether). Due to the temple divorce they could be married civilly but had to wait one year before they could marry in the temple. I'm not sure if there is a mandatory waiting period for those who have never been married before but want a civil ceremony before getting a temple marriage. She can ask her Bishop about this. Personally I would think a civil ceremony should be performed before the temple marriage but not on the same day. The reason being that the temple marriage should be the focus on that day, not the worldly extravegance that is typically associated with a civil ceremony (and it sounds like she wants to go all out, so this would apply to her). The reason the civil ceremony should not be performed AFTER the temple ceremony is because it makes it look like she/they think more of what the world thinks than what God thinks. God should have the final say, and therefore some think of it as the last one is the one that "counts", anything before it (in the minds of humans) is null if a marriage is done after the "real thing". Since her family isn't LDS this may be what they are thinking, and it wouldn't be right to let them think that the civil ceremony somehow took precidence over the temple one. For that reason unspoken proper etiquette is to have the temple ceremony be the last one. Since rings are not exchanged in the temple ceremony and rings have become a symbol to the world of marriage, a ring ceremony can take place after the temple marriage, but should not be made to look like a wedding ceremony. There shouldn't be a minister, Bishop, or anyone officiating over the ring ceremony, and while often done in the presence of friends and family, can just as easily be done in the car with only the husband and wife present. Many LDS marriages that are temple marriages are known to have extravegant receptions. Sometimes the couple will wait and exchange rings at the reception. However it's still not officiated, just the couple get up and exchange rings before they smash cake in each others face.

I'm very excited for your friend, as I'm sure you are too. But to me it sounds like she has a lot to think about. I'm assuming she has never been through the temple before, so she will need to take temple prep classes before her marriage. Traditionally these can be taken months before her wedding, although many will time them so that when the classes are done only a week or two pass before they get married. It really depends on the person, but I think if more than a year goes by and they still haven't gone through the temple, then they need to take them again. Anyway, traditionally after she gets her own endowments then they get married, although some are waiting until the next day or even the next weekend to get married.

Oh, and at the civil ceremony I went to where they were both previously divorced, the Bishop performed the marriage and asked them if they wanted to exchange rings. They said they did, and he said to the audience that he would now turn the time over to the couple for the ring ceremony. Then he took a step back and one made a joke as he fumbled for the ring then they took turns placing the ring on each others finger. No words were exchanged, although both were weepy.

Many converts who have parents or other family members who are not members will only have the temple marriage, then go all out at the reception. However if she has her heart set on this big, huge, extravegant wedding, and her fiancee doesn't object, then she could either do the huge civil ceremony then a while later (a day or two, a week, something like that) do the temple marriage. They could exchange rings at the civil ceremony or not and do it after the temple marriage. Personally I think that might be better, as the ring ceremony even in civil ceremonies usually acts as the capstone to the ceremony.

Ok, so I've rattled on for quite a while now. Sorry it's so long. There was a lot to explain, a lot of Mormon culture and a lot of opinion given.

Answer 4

I had this exact problem when I got married in the temple. My parents and I were active members of the church, but no one else. My brother, my grandparents, etc. None of them could attend the actual wedding ceremony in the temple.

My husband's family are all pioneer stock Utah Mormons, so they were all there.

This is how we handled it, but it differs from Bishop to Bishop. So she needs to have a long talk with her Bishop about how he feels.

We had a wedding party, bridesmaids, groomsmen, best man, maid of honor. No ring bearer or flower girl, though. They escorted us to all of the receptions and different activities and we had a lot of fun.

Ring Ceremony - we decided not to do. But most Bishop's have no problem with the couple exchanging rings and something like reading why they love each other so much in front of everyone. BUT! You must remember, the vows made in the temple supercede anything else. You cannot have another wedding ceremony in a church chapel after the temple wedding. So vows are kind of out. But I have seen many couples in this situation write about why they love the other so much and want to spend eternity with them, then read the letters after exchanging the rings in front of guests. Very touching.

Spend the majority of the money on the reception. We had two. One the day we were married in Utah with my immediate family and all of his. Then one a week later in Maryland with all of my extended family. We had an awesome wedding cake, decorations, DJ, etc. We did all the traditional wedding activities at the Reception. Bouquet toss, garter toss, First Dance, Brides Dance w/ Father, etc.

It is traditional in Utah for the groom's family to pay for a wedding breakfast. The day of the wedding, there is a big fancy breakfast somewhere. This is done in replacement of the Rehearsal Dinner, as we don't rehearse our temple ceremony.

HTH

Answer 5

Yes, it should be simple, but that doesn't mean that it can't be meaningful for everyone involved.

First, she needs to emphasize for her family the things that they CAN be involved in more than those they can't.

Mom can be as involved as both of them want in choosing what kind of reception or dinner/ dance or whatever that they want. That goes for choosing a dress, the food, the place, decor, whatever, too.

Since his family will probably be at the wedding ceremony, they can help by being sensitive to the feelings of her family.
Her family will want to know why they cannot attend. Answers should be honest and given with great care, and with an explanation of our understanding of the eternal nature of temple blessings.

Your friend and her fiancee may want to consider having the wedding on one day, then arranging to have photos at the temple and the reception/ party on the next. That way, everyone could arrive at the temple grounds at the same time, just for the photos, rather than having her family wait for the ceremony to be completed.

When they have their ring ceremony at their party, no one needs to officiate. The two of them can simply say a few words of love to each other and exchange rings. There can still be singing or other music, but other parts of a traditional wedding really won't seem to fit.

Walking down an aisle? Rather showy, really.

(I wouldn't even allow my husband to "give away" his daughter. No one owns her. Your friend might want to think of that.)

She can still throw her bouquet. They can dance to whatever music they love. There can be a grand celebration of their love and the anticipation of a great life together.

I wish her all the best.

Answer 6

As for your friend i think that it is a fairytale to get married in the temple. She can have the ring ceremony after the session outside on the temple grounds. Members of her family can not attend but they will let them sit in the waiting room watching a video i believe about Joseph Smith. Yes it is sad that her family can attend the ceremony but great blessing will come about.

Answer 7

I have seen many elaborate ring ceremonies. The best one was when the bride was from a Jewish family. A former stake president with a Jewish background gave a short talk before the rings were exchanged. His comments were particularly effective at pointing out Old Testament parallels to Latter-day beliefs.

Answer 8

if her family cannot attend the temple ceremony, she will have to do it again at the reception, have her exchange rings and say the "I do's." again at the reception so the nonmembers can see, unless the hardcore mormons want to make it hard for the nonmormons, which I think is not the case, but if it is, then that is sad, but I would do it again, at the reception for the nonmormons so everyone can enjoy the wedding, I see nothing wrong with saying "I love you" again and reafirming that love again on the same day to all the family members.

Answer 9

SHE needs to pick, her relatives or her faith. it incredibly is sparkling that she will't thoroughly appease the two. If she chooses her faith, then she will understandably disillusioned her relatives by using not allowing them to take section in her wedding ceremony as a results of original LDS custom and temple rules. yet she would be an outstanding little Mormon woman. If she chooses her relatives, then she will understandably disillusioned her faith by using not following their standards for recognizing the marriage no remember if it incredibly is not carried out in an LDS temple. reckoning on how strict it extremely is they could not even enable non-Mormons interior the temple to witness the marriage in any respect, much less be a factor of it. I say do the two, as needless to say the two faith and relatives are substantial to her. Have the marriage interior the temple so as that the marriage would be known by using her faith, then set up as FANCY a hoop ceremony as SHE needs together with her relatives in touch. of direction this would appease the two her relatives and her faith some, and likewise disillusioned the two her relatives and her faith some. I anticipate this conflict between faith and relatives to be in simple terms getting began for her, this could not be the tip of it. in spite of everything, it might help practice her on the long highway for an LDS marriage (and of marriage in many cases) with regard to the fee of compromise and getting to understand which you could't fulfill all of us.

Answer 10

Ive never heard any such thing. I say go all out. What could possibly be wrong with an elaborate ring ceremony.